Up on Nikon digital cameras?

[brian willis]

I have some money I need to close out of an account in my lab, and I

am looking to get a camera upgrade. Presently I have a Nikon N90x with

several Nikon lenses of various vintages, which works great for the

shooting that I do (I am a geologist. so I shoot a lot of rock walls,

down to small fossils and such in rocks). Generally shooting in the

field. I am getting tired of all the film scanning that I have to do:

particularly for things that generally just end up in Powerpoint

(Occasionally I need to print images, but very rarely above 8x10). I

am looking at Nikons SLR digital lineup; as I generally want to

process final products in photoshop. Nikon�s D100 seems to have

similar specs as their D1X (which costs twice as much!). The main

difference that pops out at me is the bust capture rate, and, well,

rocks generally do not move that fast. I read the reviews here at

photo.net, but the ones for the D100 were pre-reviews. Anyone up on

this technology who would be willing to clue me in...what would I be

sacrificing getting the �consumer� D100 (at least that is what one

reviewed called it) relative the �Professional� D1X? Or, for that

matter, alternatives that I should consider.

 

As a side note...I see that Canon now makes a 11.1 mp camera...WOW,

that has got to be near film in resolution. Seems the future in near.

[ellis_vener_photography]

Various features you may or may not need. if you want compatability with your older (non AF nikkor lenses, you'll want the D1x. I also prefer the quality of the files that come out ofthe D1x over the D100 (or similar Fuji S2.<P>Two alternatives: the kodak 14n, which is shipping this week, which is a 13.9 Mp camera with a 24x36 mm CMOS imaging sensor. and the recently discontinued Kodak DCS 760, which is a 6.5 Mp camera. I've seen new ones on eBay from reputable sources go for around $3,300. The DCS is built ona Nikon f5 platform and is a pretty large but very rugged machine and the image quality is second to none. Do some research on this camera and I think you will think it is a winner.<P>By the way, megapixel count is only one factor you should take into consideration. Afriend of mine who has been using digital imaging tool in his very high end advrtising studio business for aa few years likes to point out that squeezing more megapixels into a set chip size can result in degraded resolution. The Canon EOS 1Ds (street price of around $8,000) is a very fine machine.

[todd peach seattle, washi]

If you're running lenses of 'various vintages', I think the number one point to be aware of is that the D100 won't meter with any lens that does not have a 'chip' (for the most part, this means you have to have AF lenses).

 

OTOH, with your static subjects, you may be able to get by with 'sunny 16' (guessing at your exposure) for your first try, then dialing in for a final exposure based on looking at the image on the LCD and histogram.

[michael erlich]

I own a D100, which I use for photojournalism. Aside from the differences in

the published specs, the main difference is the D100 is based on the N80

body, and as such is nowhere near as rugged as the "professional" D1x. The

noise level in the images from the D1x are also lower, especially at high

ISO's. The D100 has only a USB-1 connection, but since I use a firewire card

reader I don't consider that a drawback. I think for your purposes the D100

would serve you well, provided you don't expose it to moisture or drop it on

the rocks!

[majid]

You should probably wait a little while before you get a D100, should you decide to. The new Canon 10D sports a street price of $1500 for an arguably superior camera, Nikon will have to bring its pricing in line. Competition is good... Also, Canon is reportedly working on a consumer DSLR for the end of the year, I wouldn't be surprised if the cost of entry-level DSLRs hovers around the $1000 range by then.

<P>

The best reviews for this class of cameras are Phil Askey's on the website <A HREF="http://www.dpreview.com/">www.dpreview.com</A>. Check out also the reviews on the Canon equivalents, I myself switched from Nikon film bodies to Canon 18 months ago.

[vedearduff]

Brian,

 

If you have (and want to continue to use) any AI or AIS lenses, you have two ways to go.

 

You can get one of the D1 series (D1, D1x, D1h) or the Kodak DCS 760. These bodies will meter (center weighted and spot) with AI/AIS lenses.

 

Or, you can one of the bodies that require a CPU in the lens and have your AI/AIS lenses chipped. The D100, Fuji S2, and the Kodak DCS 14N all require lenses with a CPU.

 

I hope this helps.

 

Vernon

[brian willis]

Thanks guys,

Prices for "good" digital cameras seem to be all over the map, and it is unclear to me why one costs substantially more than another just from their specs. For example I just looked at B&H and the 6.0 mp Kodak DCS-760 is listed for $6,000 while the 13.4 mp Kodak DCS Pro 14n is listed for $5,000. Hurts my brain...I guess I will have to spend more time to investigating, but my time is very short of late. Old Lens compatibility would be a key issue, at least in the short term. Then again, 13 mp, wow...that seems like a resolution that would satisfy me for a long time: I do not want to spend big now and then in just a few years feel that the equipment is antiquated.

[douglas_green1]

Or you could do what I did. As it is obvious to me that Nikon will need to respond to the recent aggressive intros by Canon, their pricing on the D100 will need to come down noticeably. The fact that the D100 won't work with AI and AIS lenses means that I might well make the decision to move to Canon when I get a high end Digital SLR. But since this will all take 6-12 months to sort itself out, and by then, Nikon will have certainly brought out a 11+ Megapixel camera of their own (but will it support AI/AIS lenses?) I decided to buy an Olympus E-10 for $700 as a holding action (an E-20 or a Nikon 5700 would have been the other comparable choices, but would have been more like $1000 with just the difference between 5MP and 4MP as the only real advantage). It's pretty good for most of my digital needs for the time being, and is very nearly as capable as a D100 within the range of it's built in 35-135mm lens.

 

This gives me time to see if Nikon's > 10 Megapixel intro later this year will support AI/AIS lenses, and if not, then I'll be free to evaluate ALL of the pro SLR alternatives, including the new Pentax and Olympus systems, as well as obviously, the Canon offerring, along with the Nikon-mount bodies. But frankly, if the future of Nikon's SLRs does not include AI/AIS compatibility, then I can't see any reason to stay with them, since on the features, Canon seems to be ahead of them, and, I expect that new innovative designs like the Olympus (which has the strong advantage of a sensor with a smaller physical size) will be as well. I would have gotten a D100 instead of my E-10 had it supported AI/AIS, and the same holds true for the next generation body. But if Nikon won't support my investment in their older (not to mention better) MF lenses, then there's no reason not to jump ship.

[ellis_vener_photography]

Duglas Willis wrote: <I>"For example I just looked at B&H and the 6.0 mp Kodak DCS-760 is listed for $6,000"</I><P>The DCS 760 has been discontinued and the 14n is the replacement. No one has seen any real frames out of the 14n yet, buthe 760 is pretty well establishedas a top of the line digital camera -- nearly as good as the EOS 1Ds is generally reportedto be. file size in megapixels is not the only thing that counts in assessing a digital camera. it might be, for your purposethat something like a Nikon Coolpix 5700 or Canon G2 is the perfect tool.